Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Jagpal vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 October, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41709 of 2018 Applicant :- Jagpal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is a bail application on behalf of Jagpal in connection with Case Crime No.650 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Asmoli, District Sambhal.
Heard Sri Ashutosh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri A.K.Mishra, learned AGA along with Sri Mohit Awasthi, learned counsel on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated. He has invited the attention of the Court to the medico legal examination report relating to the prosecutrix dated 29.09.2018 issued by the Chief Medical Officer, Sambhal that on the basis of an ossification test certifies her to be aged about 17 years. It is submitted that giving the usual allowance of two years, the prosecutrix would reckon to be a major. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecutrix in her statement has said that she was abducted by blandishment by the applicant and made to stay with him at Haridwar but in that statement the prosecution apart from generally speaking against the applicant attributing some violence to him, she has specifically said that he did not ravish her.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the accused did take away the prosecutrix by blandishment confined her and made some intimate moves though he did not ravish her.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, in particular, the fact that the prosecutrix has acknowledged in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., that she was not ravished, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Jagpal in connection with Case Crime No.650 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Asmoli, District Sambhal be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018 R./
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Jagpal vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 October, 2018
Judges
  • J
Advocates
  • Ashutosh Upadhyay